Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Scaling curses???  (Read 3207 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Elanchana

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
  • Princess of Derpminion
  • Respect: +1013
    • View Profile
Scaling curses???
« on: October 18, 2015, 01:47:53 pm »
0

Last night I was thinking about scaling Victory cards and about how there's only one card in the "Curse" category... and this idea came up.

Basically my thought is that there could be a non-kingdom supply pile of purple cards, sort of like the Ruins pile in Dark Ages, that give negative scaling effects. Each would have a different effect and a different way that players would have to offset them based on their strategies. In some decks they might not be an issue, but in other decks they might be a serious risk that would need to be trashed ASAP or offset as a priority.

Plague
$0 - Curse
-1VP for every (?) cards in your deck, rounded down.

Schism
$0 - Curse
-1VP for every (?) Action cards in your deck, rounded down.

Defecit
$0 - Curse
-1VP for every (?) Treasure cards in your deck, rounded down.

Scourge
$0 - Curse
-1VP for every (?) Victory cards in your deck, rounded down.

These would mostly just be in the Curse category so that they could be picked up by cards like Fortune Teller and Vagrant. Of course there would have to be another qualifier on them so regular cursers wouldn't distribute them... unless that would make them better.

And there's the question of how these scaling curses would be distributed in the first place. The options I can come up with are:
- Exactly like the Ruins pile - all mixed together and distributed in turn order (target "gains a scaling curse")
- Mixed together with the regular Curses and distributed in turn order (target "gains a Curse")
- One pile of a specific kind, chosen at random before the game if there's a scaling-curser in the kingdom (target "gains a Curse from the scaling curse pile")
- Multiple piles, with different cards distributing each different kind (target "gains a Plague/Schism/Defecit/Scourge")
- Multiple piles, with the attacker choosing which to give out (attacker should "choose a scaling curse for each player to gain")
- Multiple piles, with the receiver choosing which to gain (target "chooses a scaling curse to gain")
There's gotta be a better way to say "scaling curse" but I can't think of one right now so let's just leave it there. This is also why I haven't been capitalizing it either because it's not a good official name for these things.

This is where I would list possible Action-Attack cards that would distribute scaling curses but um... I can't be bothered to do that right now. Although it might be interesting to have some type of Event that actually replaces the Curse pile with scaling curses.

Thoughts? Ideas?
Logged
Sure it's just a game. The same way that your best friend in the whole world is "just a friend".

TwitchYouTubeMusic

!!CHANGED MY USERNAME ON 2.0!!

ephesos

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 347
  • Shuffle iT Username: Ephesos
  • Respect: +290
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2015, 04:39:59 pm »
+2

You could call them sCurses, for short. I'll try using that for a bit here. At the very least, it sounds funny when you say it.

I think the clearest way would be to have each one be handed out by a different card.
e.g.
Plague Cart $6-Action-Attack
+$1, Each other player gains a Plague
or
Mortgage $3-Treasure-Attack
When you play this, trash it. If you did, +$2
You may overpay for this card. For each $2 you overpaid, each other player gains a Deficit.

This way, you know what level of sCurse you are handing out, and you can balance the card appropriately.

The power difference between each of the sCurses is just too difficult to balance properly if you're going to hand them out in some random way; unlike Ruins, where you getting +1 Buy instead of +1 Action only rarely matters(and you have to sacrifice an Action to do it), different versions of the sCurses are going to just blow the others out of the water on certain boards. This is especially true for boards without trashing, which makes the ones that are good when there are no trashers(Plague, Deficit) much better, unless you overtune the others.

I guess it might depend on your aversion to chance in the mechanics of a card. If you're fine with having a random chance and sometimes getting really lucky with the sCurse pile. I'll just say that I'm not a fan of Black Market and feel that it turns most games with it on the board into 20% you get a lucky card and win, 20% I get lucky and win, and 60% we actually play Dominion. Things like your opponent gets the only trasher, or you get a Bridge. So I feel the sCurses are too uneven to hand out randomly.
Logged

Elanchana

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
  • Princess of Derpminion
  • Respect: +1013
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2015, 08:29:11 pm »
0

^ That makes sense. The reason the Ruins work as random is that they're mostly equal in their uselessness.

It does make it easier to assign a specific sCurse to each new attack, but my favorite option is the "attacker chooses" distribution. It gives you the opportunity to put a huge dent in your opponent's score, but it forces you to think hard about what would hurt them the most based on their strategy (and you could get it wrong). What do you think?

Also, those cards you came up with look kinda weak - or am I just underestimating the power sCurses could have?
Logged
Sure it's just a game. The same way that your best friend in the whole world is "just a friend".

TwitchYouTubeMusic

!!CHANGED MY USERNAME ON 2.0!!

Elanchana

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
  • Princess of Derpminion
  • Respect: +1013
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2015, 09:18:21 am »
0

You know, the more I think about it, the more I like this idea:

There are six new action cards, four of which distribute each specific type of sCurse, one of which lets the attacker choose a sCurse for each player to gain, and one of which gives a chosen sCurse to whoever plays the card.

In addition, these cards come with an extra type (like "Looter" for Ruins) that has special instructions: "When this card is in the kingdom, replace the Curse pile with the four piles of Plague, Schism, Defecit, and Scourge. When a player would gain a Curse, they instead choose one of these to gain."

This avoids the problem of having to reword every single curser but still keeps the choice element. I don't know if the sCurses would be in big or small piles but... eh. Thoooooughts?
Logged
Sure it's just a game. The same way that your best friend in the whole world is "just a friend".

TwitchYouTubeMusic

!!CHANGED MY USERNAME ON 2.0!!

faust

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3377
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5142
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2015, 04:05:01 pm »
0

You could make an event that lets you exchange the Curse pile with an sCurse pile of your choice.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Limetime

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1237
  • Shuffle iT Username: limetime
  • Respect: +1179
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2015, 05:52:42 pm »
0

^ That makes sense. The reason the Ruins work as random is that they're mostly equal in their uselessness.

It does make it easier to assign a specific sCurse to each new attack, but my favorite option is the "attacker chooses" distribution. It gives you the opportunity to put a huge dent in your opponent's score, but it forces you to think hard about what would hurt them the most based on their strategy (and you could get it wrong). What do you think?

Also, those cards you came up with look kinda weak - or am I just underestimating the power sCurses could have?
If the attacker chooses then it can be political in the same way swindler is  :-\
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11809
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12849
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2015, 05:55:42 pm »
0

^ That makes sense. The reason the Ruins work as random is that they're mostly equal in their uselessness.

It does make it easier to assign a specific sCurse to each new attack, but my favorite option is the "attacker chooses" distribution. It gives you the opportunity to put a huge dent in your opponent's score, but it forces you to think hard about what would hurt them the most based on their strategy (and you could get it wrong). What do you think?

Also, those cards you came up with look kinda weak - or am I just underestimating the power sCurses could have?
If the attacker chooses then it can be political in the same way swindler is  :-\

Swindler is an official card though, so it's not too political.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Elanchana

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 697
  • Princess of Derpminion
  • Respect: +1013
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2016, 02:37:11 pm »
0

I'm resurrecting this thread because Elestan offered to playtest these when I saw him a couple months ago. So I want to get at least a first "draft" of each card finalized so I can know what they're like to play with.

For now I think I'll call these cards Afflictions, since that's the closest synonym for "curse" that looked good on Thesaurus.com and a name like "scaling curse" doesn't really sound Dominion-y. The actions that use them specifically would be called Afflictors. If anyone can think up a better name (which I'm sure exists), please tell me.

From now on, any text in red is an important undecided aspect.

I don't think the base Afflictions need much of a change, apart from how much they scale, so here's what I have:

Quote from: Affliction cards
Plague
$0 - Curse - Affliction
-1VP for every # cards in your deck, rounded down.

Schism
$0 - Curse - Affliction
-1VP for every # Action cards in your deck, rounded down.

Defecit
$0 - Curse - Affliction
-1VP for every # Treasure cards in your deck, rounded down.

Scourge
$0 - Curse - Affliction
-1VP for every # Victory cards in your deck, rounded down.

I haven't come up with any ideas for the six Afflictor cards (though ephesos's ideas are a good start) but this is what the description of that card type would be.

Quote from: Afflictor card type
If any Kingdom card has the type Afflictor, replace the Curse pile with the four Affliction piles: Plague, Schism, Defecit, and Scourge. If a card requires a player to gain a Curse, they instead choose an Affliction to gain.
The number of Affliction cards in each pile is # (scaling for players).

So, concerns and stuff I still need:
- Obviously, the Afflictor cards themselves. I want to stick with my plan from the fourth post of this thread unless someone comes up with a better one. So, four Attack-Afflictor cards would distribute each of the individual Afflictions. An additional Attack-Afflictor would let the attacker choose which Affliction each player gains (I know it's political but it's not luck-based like Swindler is). The last Afflictor card would not be an attack but something Death Cart-ish that gives the player Afflictions of their choice (or does something else involving them) in exchange for a sizeable benefit. The power balance is going to be important with these. Afflictions will most likely hurt more than Curses, so Afflictors sort of have to be Looters in reverse (eg. the Afflictor equivalent of Witch would be to Witch what Witch is to Cultist). The attacker's choice Afflictor is definitely going to be $5 or more, no matter how good its bonus is.
- The scaling power of the Afflictions. If they're scaling alt-VP in reverse, then Plague would be 10 cards, Schism would be 3 Action cards, and Scourge would be 4 Victory cards. Though that seems like the easiest option, it might overpower them. And the jury's out on Deficit on that front. It will probably take playtesting to figure out exactly the best point values but I need something to start with.
- The number of Afflictions per pile. The logical default is the same as the Curse count - ie. 10 per player besides the first. The concern for that though is how it would affect 3-pile endings to have 3 additional full-size Curse piles in the supply. For example, if someone was getting cursed normally with an Afflictor on the board, switching from taking Defecits to Plagues with one Defecit left in the pile could prolong the game - is that overpowered or not? The other option is making each Affliction pile smaller than the curse pile (bigger doesn't seem any good), although that makes 3-piling even easier unless there's a rule that the entire Affliction supply, rather than just one type, counts as a pile.


I'm really excited to get these cards designed and playtested and everything. I'm especially looking forward to seeing how different deck types respond to Afflictions in practice. Add a Scourge to my overdrawn golden deck? No problem! Add a Defecit to my terminal draw big money deck with no trashing? Ouch.
Logged
Sure it's just a game. The same way that your best friend in the whole world is "just a friend".

TwitchYouTubeMusic

!!CHANGED MY USERNAME ON 2.0!!

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5607
  • Respect: +3676
    • View Profile
Re: Scaling curses???
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2016, 04:15:58 pm »
0

As I read the first post, I already had decided in my head that these curse cards were already far too strong in their current state. Give me a break, a curse card that gives -VP equal to the amount of cards in your deck? That's insanity.

Thankfully, you already decided that you were going to water down the Curses somewhat. Firstly, let me say that these Curse givers need to be incredibly expensive to buy, and must give you a marginal to no effect in order to be used, since the Curse attack is incredibly strong. This is the way it has to be. If there is good trashing, it won't be worth going for at all until the late game, where the deficit in points might be a deciding factor. If there is bad trashing, then of course it's still not great to go for until late game, as the curses can be trashed, and there's almost no benefit to you. However, if there is NO trashing, then these cards instantly become very strong and must be pursued, unless there is some crazy quick rush strategy.

Now that this is out of the way, I will now look at the Scaled Curses one at a time, and try and determine a fair amount of Curse effect.

1. Action Curse

The Action Curse should give you -1 VP for every 4/5 Action cards in your deck. This won't be incredible in a BM heavy deck, but you won't want the Curser giving these out in that game anyways, which makes this card a stronger Curse in engines, except of course the all cards option.

The Action Curse Attack should give you no benefit at all, or at most +1 Card or something heinous. The reason for this is twofold: Firstly, this card is great for attacking opponents in big engine games, where a lot of Action cards are going to be readily available. Secondly, this card should be able to also give out either 2 Ruins, or an Action Curse. That's an insane attack. Probably worth $7 or $6, but I'd have to test this.

2. Victory Curse

The Victory Curse can probably be -1 VP for every 3 Victory cards, and such an attack on the board will probably mitigate Duchy Dancing (because Duchies get worth less and less with each purchase) and Silk Road strategies.

The Victory Curse Curser can be a little stronger, with a +$1 bonus, but should probably be worth about $5 or $6.

3. Treasure Curse

You start with 7 Coppers in your deck, so this must be considered automatically. I would say that this Curse should give a -1 VP for every 4 or 5 Treasures. It's not a strong Scaling Curse, and it probably won't ever get above -2 VP (unless Mountebank happens...)

The Treasure Curser could be like Mountebank and hand out Coppers, but this is so ridiculous and OP that it cannot be like this. I think it should give your opponent a Silver, give him a Gold, or give him nothing at all. Also, it could be some special Copper card that puts itself back into a pile like Spoils when used, but it's a useless copper card essentially. Just a temporary junking attack idea I've had in my head for awhile. It should cost $5, it should not be giving out +$2 like Mountebank unless it gives out nothing with that Curse.

4. Card Curse

This card gets stronger and stronger as the game goes on, and if there's no trashing, losing this split is practically an automatic loss. I do not feel comfortable even having such a card in the game. It will either be too strong or too weak. I do not recommend this card at all.

Those are my initial thoughts.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2016, 04:20:46 pm by Seprix »
Logged
DM me for ideas on a new article, either here or on Discord (I check Discord way more often)
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.16 seconds with 21 queries.